blanked

Both versions have their strong points. I would say the rejected one was better for having the dino an addition to the map instead of the whole map. And this one for being an easier visual read, I also like the wood-graining.

tonythai1981

rubydoob wrote:The quibble about the sail or the windows- this is art, not a photo. You would tell Pablo that his eyes aren't lined up! It's called artist license to change things. This is absolutely beautiful and will buy the second it prints.

palookaboy

DianaSprinkle wrote:LOL, I have to say that I don't have a problem with this shirt as the artist of the first shirt. It seems like a different take and execution than my "Unexpected Error" shirt. Similar jokes in some ways, but that happens all the time.

Kudos for being so cool about that; not many artists would be so agreeable.

However, I think one of the reasons (not necessarily the main one) for the 'similar shirt exists' rule is to promote diverse designs. Whether intentional or not, ramy's design was a fraternal twin of yours. The 'joke' may not have been the same, but I mean come on, it was a firefox covering the Earth.

palookaboy

rowanmikaio wrote:This is horrible logic. This is like saying that because you've gotten off when you were speeding before, it's okay if you're arrested "for going 40 in a 25 mph zone", even though the signs say the speed limit is 40.

No, it's more like saying you can't complain for getting nailed going 45 in a 40 zone when you've gotten away with going 80 in a 15 zone.

oscillatingelvis

reganrabbit

freakthankyou wrote:I love the purple dot in Georgia near Atlanta. I find it appropriate, despite the fact that it's more smack on top of Macon, where it's not really appropriate, but I'm very literal.

I was in Savannah there for a while... Which color is the CRAZY color? ;)

collinvh

palookaboy

flamestamp13 wrote:As the "artist" (or as I like to say, the guy who randomly poked at Illustrator until something happened) who did this last time, I have no issue with ramyb doing the same joke. Sure, it's kind of obvious, but that didn't stop me, and I don't consider this one to be "stealing" my joke.

And to the people who say the image doesn't need the text, if it wasn't there, it wouldn't be a map joke, it would be a bad driver joke.

I'll say the same thing I said to DianaSprinkle in the Global Warming thread: very cool that you don't mind a previously used designed being re-used. But, while he did it intentionally or not, the 'similar shirts exist' rule exists for a reason. This seems to be violating that rule.

blanked

tjost wrote:Again though as you just pointed out its not exactly the map from dora. Not only does it not look the same, mine is actually unraveld a bit ( which the dora map does not do) to show its not that map nor a zelda map. In the end its up to woot though.

My reasoning on this is woot wanted pop-culture in moderation, one element is fine But like Spiritgreen's Link your Link is paired with another pop-culture reference. There is nothing solely yours in the design. That is why using the Map character from Dora doesn't fly here while it does in the Patcha the explorer design.

Wait, Patcha is just a made up name, right? I haven't read the right kind of books to know.

Edit: Well, pop-culture in moderation may not be the perfect way to explain it either, since someone created a Nintendoland and had like 20 different pop-culture references in it. But that theme park was his, you have the 2 references without anything else to say they are not in one of those fictional worlds. If you had put link in New York and had him turn to the equally confused Map for guidance I would guess that it would have gotten by.

blanked

DianaSprinkle

palookaboy wrote:I'll say the same thing I said to DianaSprinkle in the Global Warming thread: very cool that you don't mind a previously used designed being re-used. But, while he did it intentionally or not, the 'similar shirts exist' rule exists for a reason. This seems to be violating that rule.

That rule only applies if the first design actually becomes a shirt. The "exists" part of the rule as it were. The first design for this one was never made into a shirt.

Also... woot is very particular about this rule, sometimes they are strict to an extreme and sometimes they let similar shirts pass on by. In last week's Halloween derby, Ramyb's bunny avoided rejection even though a slightly different version of the same idea by him was rejected for "similar shirt's existing" in a previous derby. The rejectionator is fickle.

brockart

fabgab

tsarevna wrote:Sad this was rejected. I'm a woman and I thought it was a clever instruction manual that men should be reminded of constantly - I was planning to buy one for myself and my husband if it printed. Seemed more to me to be an amusingly useful map than an insult or degradation.

I'm wondering if it's really as noble as you're thinking. Seems like it could also be a "bases" thing, which would be... yeah.

justplainme

rowanmikaio wrote:I'm kind of surprised that no one seems to have commented on the art itself. I'm normally pretty forgiving, and I've defended Ramy's decisions a few times in the past, but I have to say that the car looks pretty awkward with the way it's sticking out of the water. I mean, the rear left tire, based on this perspective, hasn't even hit the water yet. That means that over HALF of the car isn't in the water. That wouldn't happen, because the weight of the car would push the back half down until it hit the water.

And since the guy is not only outside of the car, but has managed to get a decent distance away, the car is sinking ridiculously slowly.

Sorry, but I can't vote for this one. Maybe next time, Ramy!

You're definitely overanalyzing this. Nobody is going to sit there staring at the shirt thinking, "Why hasn't the car sunk more?" They'll just see that the GPS led the person astray, laugh, and go on with life. I say thumbs up for the design!

Woot.com is operated by Woot Services LLC.
Products on Woot.com are sold by Woot, Inc., other than items on Wine.Woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page.
Product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ
literary point of view;
the narratives do not express Woot's editorial opinion.
Aside from literary abuse, your use of this site also subjects you to Woot's
terms of use
and
privacy policy.
Woot may designate a user comment as a Quality Post, but that doesn't mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post.